RE: Game Balance

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Game Balance

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> RE: Game Balance

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

[Poll]

Game Balance

Axis are generally too strong

26% (5)

Axis are slightly too strong

31% (6)

Game is balanced

26% (5)

Allies are slightly too strong

5% (1)

Allies are incredibly strong

5% (1)

Tanks and mech are too strong thats the problem

5% (1)

Total Votes : 19

(last vote on : 11/19/2021 7:15:56 AM)
(Poll ended: 11/21/2021 7:00:00 AM)

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Game Balance - 11/28/2021 9:38:56 PM

Nirosi

Posts: 1776
Joined: 9/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

This is not -20 every turn. This is just a reduction of the recovery by 20%

If if is a reduction of recovery, would than not then apply every turn?

I was under the impression that the -20 was added to the recovery formula that applies every tunr. So you would, for example, get +2% recovery instead of +22%, or -5% instead of +15%?

(in reply to ncc1701e)

Post #: 91

RE: Game Balance - 11/28/2021 9:48:21 PM

generalfdog

Posts: 214
Joined: 12/18/2020
Status: offline

My big concern with using the rail repair rate to balance things is that I'm not finding that Germany needs slowed in 41 just winter 41-42 and summer 42, seems to me rail repair will slow them at wrong time, maybe air power improvement will make up for that but then we are right back where we started. Russia is in trouble once they run out of reserves

(in reply to Nirosi)

Post #: 92

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 6:08:29 AM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

You need to slow down Germans in summer 1941 also. Early Barbarossa April 1941 is devastating. Usually this is ending with Leningrad taken, Moscow taken.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to generalfdog)

Post #: 93

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 7:04:49 PM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nirosi

quote:

This is not -20 every turn. This is just a reduction of the recovery by 20%

If if is a reduction of recovery, would than not then apply every turn?

I was under the impression that the -20 was added to the recovery formula that applies every tunr. So you would, for example, get +2% recovery instead of +22%, or -5% instead of +15%?

I don't think so. Instead of getting an effectiveness recovery of 20%, you are getting 16%.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Nirosi)

Post #: 94

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 7:17:32 PM

Nirosi

Posts: 1776
Joined: 9/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

I don't think so. Instead of getting an effectiveness recovery of 20%, you are getting 16%.

Hum... that would be what -20% would normally mean, but most of the time rules and people say -20% instead of -20 points pf percentage (hence I assumed -20 point of percentage).

I'll try to test it. Most of the time units in ok shape at 70% or so recover around 10% or so. This would mean then... 9% instead in winter. I have a hard time believing it would be so little! Seems to me why bother even coding it for so little...

I'll try to test it.

< Message edited by Nirosi -- 11/29/2021 7:36:41 PM >

(in reply to ncc1701e)

Post #: 95

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 7:33:49 PM

Nirosi

Posts: 1776
Joined: 9/17/2017
Status: offline

I tested it. It is most probably 10 points of percentage (so 5% instead of 15% in winter). The other way around (13.5 instead of 15) would have meant nothing honestly.

The first winter turn in the 1942 scenario, all German units in Winter went from 100% to 93% and then for a second winter turn the same units went down to 85%. So they lost 7% and then 8%. This can only mean they gained 3% and then 2% respectively (quite normal at this level), minus the 10 for winter.

When Blizzard struck I monitored a unit that was down to 76% (down from 100% over 4-5 turns just due to weather, so another proof), blizzard by itself brought it to 69%. So if that unit would have normally gained 13% (which can makes sense in good supply at 76% readiness), the results work perfectly.

< Message edited by Nirosi -- 11/29/2021 7:36:02 PM >

(in reply to Nirosi)

Post #: 96

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 8:20:29 PM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

Thanks for your testing. So, from your point of view, is the impact of blizzard enough?

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Nirosi)

Post #: 97

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 8:49:02 PM

Nirosi

Posts: 1776
Joined: 9/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

So, from your point of view, is the impact of blizzard enough?

If the units do not get attacked, no, not enough. I am not sure if I have the patience to test it with attacks as it will require many attacks and tests to compare. But maybe that the -20% plus been victim of enough attacks during the Winter might be enough (but might "cost" too much for the Soviet to be feasible other than small sectors)? Just like that instinctively, without testing it, I would guess that attacking armors at strategic places at 1vs1 might be worth it during winter. It could make the difference about them been ready earlier or not.

But then again, the difference might just be 2 extra turns of recovery only, so they might be ready in April instead of March (because they will usually be high supply hexes recovering faster anyway).

Maybe then the -20% for Blizzard could be increased by 5% (same with the -10% for Winter)? Maybe that Heavy Rain should also have a supply penalty like that, of 5% let's say? The small extra 5% in 3 different weathers will add-up I think.

(in reply to ncc1701e)

Post #: 98

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 9:05:56 PM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

Well, I am guessing but, with the reduction of the rail repair rate, the Germans may have lower effectiveness when winter comes. So perhaps, the Russian will be more successful in their winter attacks; gaining more experience than previously. Thanks to this, on-map Russian armies will increase experience a little bit faster by replacing their step losses.

And Germans will have to recover a little bit longer before triggering Case Blue. With the new Oka river line, this will also help Russian to slow them down.

Can't wait the next patch.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Nirosi)

Post #: 99

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 9:08:42 PM

Nirosi

Posts: 1776
Joined: 9/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

Can't wait the next patch.

This games keeps continuously improving

(in reply to ncc1701e)

Post #: 100

RE: Game Balance - 11/29/2021 9:13:31 PM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

Yeah and, if it does not work, I insist but more reserve Infantry Armies will do it. It's mathematical.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Nirosi)

Post #: 101